Report submitted to Chris and Gayle Bundschu,
Florida Bureau of Archaeological Research, Office of the State Archaeologist,
and the Lee County Historic Preservation Board

December, 2008

Note: Because of the uneven number of oversized pages (9 through 13), page 14 is
purposely omitted. Thus, the text continues directly from page 7 to page 15.

BACKGROUND

Property owned by Chris and Gayle Bundschu lies within the Pineland Site Complex
(8LL1902), a National Register of Historic Places-listed archaeological district (Figure 1).
Excavation by heavy equipment on the Bundschu property on September 27, 2007 removed
sediment from a roughly rectangular area approximately 12.5 x 7.5 meters and 2 meters deep,
excepting the northeast corer, which is about 3.3 x 2.6 m (Figure 2). This removed a large
volume of previously undisturbed archaeological sediments of the feature known as Brown's
Complex Mound 4.

Lee County imposed a stop-work order on this project due to concerns about
unmarked human burials, pursuant to state statute (chapter 872 FS) as referenced in
chapter 22-106 of the Lee County Land Development Code. This was based on published
archalological evidence of Calusa Indians having buried their dead in elevated midden-
mounds during the Caloosahatchee IIA period (A.D. 500-800; Marquardt 1999:91-93). A
significantt amount of the material impacted by the septic-drainfield excavation appeared to
date to that period, based on stratigraphic correlation with other well known deposits at the
Brown's Mound Complex at Pineland.
At the request of property owners Chris and Gayle Bundschu, Lee County planner
Gloria Saigo. and State Archaeologist Ryan Wheeler. William Marquardt proposed an
inl esigatiion to determine whether or not human remains are present and to document the
%eldinmentation layers tor comparison w ith previous systematic work at the Pineland Site
Collmplc\ This plan was acceptable to all parties, and the field investigations were undertaken
by Willi.ii NM.iUatirdt and Karen Walker on October 16-19 and October 22-26. 2007. They
were assisted 1. two professional archaeologists working in the area who volunteered their
time Tom Mclntosh (2 dai s) and Eugene Chapman (3 days) and by archaeologist and
Randell Research Center cmplo\ ce Michael Wylde (1 da,). Without their assistance. this
project could not have been accomplished in as timely a manner as it was. and we are very
gratftlil to them.

This report constitutes the written summary of findings as promised in Marquardt's
original proposal. By agreement, it is being submitted to the property owners, the State
Archaeologist, and the Lee County Historic Preservation Board. Copies of this report will
also be filed with other records of the Pineland Site excavations at the Florida Museum of
Natural History and at the Randell Research Center (RRC) in Pineland.

BCM4 SEPTIC-DRAINFIELD PROJECT METHODS: FIELD WORK
Stakes were set in at the covers of the septic drainfield excavation, and a general
elevation datum stake was tied in to the Pineland Elevation System. For the most part, the
Mound 4 (septic pit) profiles correlate to levels 69 through 86 of the Pineland Elevation
System (PES) established for archaeological work throughout the Pineland Site Complex.
Using a surveying transit-level, we measured the elevations of the surface all along
the edge of the excavation, and set in survey pins at regular intervals along the edges of
the undisturbed profiles to be documented. Once our string-lines with known elevations
were established along each of the profiles, our next task was to clean the profiles for better
visibility so that we could then document them. Because the profiles were not vertical, this
involved some cutting back of them. Using trowels, working from top to bottom, we cleared
the profiles of disturbed sediments, and pulled loose sediments away from the profile bases
in order to reveal the maximum vertical exposure of each profile (Figures 3 and 4). We took

Figure 3. Archaeologists Bill Marquardt (left) and Eugene Chapman work on east
profile.

Figure 4. Archaeologists Karen Walker (left) and Eugene Chapman work on east
profile.

both wide-angle photographs (e.g., Figure 5) of each of the exposed profiles and 2-meter-
wide close-ups of all profiles to document the stratification. The close-up images were later
stitched together by Sue Ellen Hunter to create composite images all of six profile segments
(see below).
Under the unfortunate circumstances of having no artifacts in context or anything
else associated with the destroyed area of Mound 4, we endeavored to plot each and every
artifact (and in some cases bone) that we encountered as we were cutting back the profiles.
In order to plot. number, and remove artifacts before drawings of the strata existed, we set up
the drawings on a large sheet of graph paper taped to a field drawing board, using the string-
lines for our measuring reference. Each encountered item was plotted immediately, given a
specimen number, and bagged so that work could continue. We included the word "Septic"
after "BCM4" (on the bags) to distinguish the 2007 work from John Dietler's 2006 BCM4
work associated with the nearby house foundations (Dietler 2007). The artifact plotting
worked well overall. However, later when the strata and features such as activity surfaces,
post molds. and pits were drawn, plotted object locations were sometimes located on a border
area and it was difficult to determine the stratum with which they were associated. In these
cases, the assigned stratum may read "Stratum 4 or 5," for example. Even so, few decorated
sherds or other artifacts diagnostic of time periods were found in situ, underscoring the great
loss of information about Mound 4.

',y --2; .-- ."^. -

Figure 5. Archaeologist Tom McIntosh holds a stadia rod in southwest corner of the
drainfield pit. Note the distinct layers of shell midden and darkly stained activity
surfaces and post molds revealed following troweling of the profiles. The new septic
tank can be seen on the right, near the ladder. The tank is located 3.15 meters west of
the west profile of the drainfield pit. The tank is 1.74 meters wide (north to south).

Standard descriptions of the distinct sediments were made, and Munsell soil colors
were noted. Unlike the artifacts, the sediment, radiocarbon, and shell samples were plotted
and collected after the drawing was completed. Samples of one or more shells were selected
for possible radiocarbon analysis from each stratum and given coded "RC" designations.
Five of these were sent to Beta Analytic for analysis (see below); four of these appear on
the east profile (south section) with filled triangles and one appears on the east profile (north
section) as specimen #43-C. Due to time limitations, sediment and shell samples were
collected by holding an open labeled bag (6-x-6-inch and 9-x-12-inch sizes, respectively)
up to the profile at the desired place representing the stratum and with a trowel loosening
the material so that it fell into the bag. Because of the density of shell in several of the strata
(e.g., 2 and 5), sediment samples from those strata may contain more shell than sand. The
origin of each sediment sample appears on the east profile (south section) as an "S" enclosed
in a square. Shell samples (east and south profiles) appear as "shell sample #1" and so on.
The shell samples cannot serve as excavated bulk faunal samples to be fine-screened because
they surely lost much small material, especially small bones of vertebrate animals, during
collection. But they can serve as samples of the molluscan assemblages representative of
food items collected by Mound 4's residents.

If human remains had been encountered during the profile documentation, these
would have been marked and left in place and the provisions of 872 FS would have been
followed. However, although many fish, mammal, reptile, and bird bones were observed and
identified, no human bones were found.
All artifacts, other specimens (e.g., animal bones), and samples obtained in the
course of this investigation belonged to the owners, but they offered to donate diagnostic and
provenienced items to the Florida Museum of Natural History. The Museum agreed to curate
these items in perpetuity, and a signed gift agreement was executed to record this gift. The
owners requested a representative sample of unprovenienced artifacts for display in the foyer
of their new home. We delivered these artifacts and some animal bone specimens, along with
interpretive information to accompany their display. A listing of these items is included in
Appendix A.

BCM4 PROJECT METHODS: LAB AND CURATION
Both BCM4 collections (2006, 2007) of artifacts and other specimens/samples
were cleaned (as needed) and cataloged at the RRC under the supervision of lab manager
Michael Wylde. In addition, the 2006 bulk samples were water-screened through stacked
1/4" and 1/ 16"-mesh screens. Accession numbers 2006-15 and 2007-10 were assigned to
the respective two collections. Catalogs for each collection appear in Appendix A of this
report; all but the smallest artifacts were labeled with their assigned catalog numbers. Non-
artifact specimens and samples also were assigned catalog numbers; these are included in the
appendix.
Both catalogs in Appendix A include artifact identifications made by Marquardt.
Pottery, shell, and bone artifacts were identified in gross categories and assigned types where
possible by Marquardt. Microscopic analysis was not used for the pottery so Sand-tempered
Plain and Pineland Plain pottery has been lumped together as Sand-tempered Plain (STP).
The shell and bone artifact typologies of Marquardt (1992) and Walker (1992), respectively,
were followed for identifications. Gifford Waters (Florida Museum historical archaeologist)
assisted in the identification of several historic-period artifacts.
Walker described the 2007 stratification in the field and in this report (below). Sue
Ellen Hunter (Florida Museum illustrator) transformed our original field drawings into the
profiles shown in this report. Walker identified the bone specimens listed in the catalogs,
using the Florida Museum's (Environmental Archaeology) comparative skeletal collection
as needed. In the stratigraphic descriptions, molluscan and fish common and scientific
names follow those standardized by the American Fisheries Society (Nelson et al. 2004;
Turgeon et al. 1998). Under Walker's supervision, UF Anthropology graduate student Jessica
Zimmer sorted, identified, and quantified two shell samples. This work followed standard
zooarchaeological procedures.
Both BCM4 collections (2006, 2007) are curated at the Florida Museum in the
Anthropology Division. The 2006 collection includes: field notes by Dietler; a set of
profile drawings on 8-x-l 1-inch graph sheets; digital photographs (on CD) and photo
log; a catalog, associated artifacts and other specimens; associated samples; a Friends of
the Randell Research Center newsletter (volume 7, no. 3), and a copy of Dietler's report
(2007). The constituents of the 2007 collection are: field notes by Marquardt and Walker,

one original, large graph sheet with all profile drawings on it, photographs (CD and a printed
set of the profiles), a catalog, associated artifacts and other specimens (some plotted, many
not), associated samples, and a copy of this report. Additionally there is much written
documentation about the 2007 project. All items in the collections are curated in archival
containers.

BCM4 SEPTIC-DRAINFIELD STRATIGRAPHY
For interpretive purposes, there are essentially four documented profiles associated
with the BCM4 septic-drainfield pit (Figure 6). They are the south (Figures 7 and 11),
west (Figures 8 and 12), north (Figures 9, 13, and 14), and east (Figures 10, 15, and 16)
profiles. The north and east profiles each have sections of them that are discontinuous
due to the "Utah" shape of the pit (see Figure 6). As a result, these profiles exhibit the
drawing labels "North Profile (West Section)," "North Profile (East Section)," "East Profile
(North Section)," and "East Profile (South Section)" and the labeling of their associated
provenienced specimens and samples follows.
During our 2007 fieldwork, the ground surface of the area surrounding the open
drainfield pit was minimal within the boundaries of the owner's property. Along the edge
of the pit on the south, north, and most dramatically the west were great piles of disrupted,
undocumented deposits of midden and activity surfaces (see figures 2, 3, and 5) that came
from the then open drainfield pit. To the east, two large exotic palm trees had recently been
placed into the ground (top of Figure 2) and the holes dug for them would have disrupted
the upper strata (at least 1, 2, 3, and 4). (We noted that numerous individuals of a species of
terrestrial snail, probably also exotic, were on the trunk of the tree. Several were collected for
the RRC's comparative shell collection.)
Stratum 1 is recorded in all profiles and is described as a variable gray sandy deposit
with fragments of shell, rock, modem debris, gumbo-limbo roots, and other disturbances. In
the east profile (south section), at least five irregularly spaced gouges can be seen along the
surface intruding through Stratum 1 and sometimes into Stratum 2 (Figure 16). These may
have been produced by the backhoe used to destroy the mound area. A dramatic exception to
the general Stratum 1 description is documented in the west profile (Figure 12). Between 4.5
m and 12.5 m along the profile, a much deeper area has been disturbed due to the installation
of a septic tank. Adjacent to this, moving north, is a deposit of modem gravel rock and a
plastic drain pipe. Covering this is disturbed fill that continues further and even deeper to the
north. At least three houses have stood on this privately owned lot since at least the mid-
twentieth century. Each has increased in size and correspondingly has resulted in increasingly
more damage to Mound 4, with the most recent construction resulting in the most extensive
destruction of all.
Stratum 2 is also recorded in all profiles and is described as a dense shell deposit with
light gray sand, animal bone, charred wood fragments, pottery sherds, and shell artifacts.
The shells were noted as being very clean and white with little to no tannin staining. Based
on field observation, the most abundant shell type appeared to be that of the lightning whelk
(Busycon sinistrum) and it was followed by pearwhelk (Busycotypus spiratus). Next in
abundance were true tulip (Fasciolaria tulipa), fighting conch (Strombus alatus), eastern
oyster (Crassostrea virginica), and crown conch (Melongena corona). Next in abundance

were banded tulip (Fasciolaria hunteria), horse conch (Pleuroploca gigantea), southern
quahog (Mercenaria campechiensis), bay scallop (Argopecten irradians), ribbed mussel
(Geukensia demissa), and surf clam (Spisula solidissima).
Shell sample #1 (2007-10-122), plotted on the east profile (south section) within 2a,
represents this Stratum 2 assemblage. Its '/"-screened portion was sorted and quantified
(Table 1). The results differ from the visual field observations in three ways. Although noted
in the field as present, the small fragments of ribbed mussel, when quantified, produced an
MNI count of nine. Thus, ribbed mussel shells are more abundant than observed. Although
horse conch was observed in the profiles, no shells of this type appeared in sample #1. On
the other hand, a sunray venus clam (Macrocallista nimbosa) shell appears in the sample but
none were observed in the profiles.
Had it not been for the south profile, Stratum 2 would have been interpreted by
us as a single episode of midden over the entire area of Mound 4. Indeed, the above shell
composition characterizes Stratum 2 in all profiles. The south profile (Figure 7) nonetheless
reveals a series of four midden episodes separated by four sandy activity-surface strata (strata
3a, 3b, 3c). It is for this reason that we divide Stratum 2 into 2a, 2b, 2c, and 2d with 2a being
the youngest deposit and 2d the oldest. The south profile clearly documents an eastward
progression of both midden and activity surface deposits.

Fifteen artifacts and four bones were found in situ in Stratum 2 and plotted on the
profile drawings. Most are from 2a. These include 11 Sand-tempered Plain pottery sherds
and one Belle Glade Plain sherd. Three lightning whelk hammers (Figure 17), type C variety
(specimens 58-S, 59-S and 60-S [2007-10-58, 59, 60]), were plotted, all in 2a of the east
profile (south section). The four bones are mouthplates, found together and in articulation,
from a spotted eagle ray (Aetobatus narinari). One sediment sample comes from 2a.
Stratum 2a's RC-S (radiocarbon-shell) specimen (east profile south section) is a large
horse conch columella that was sent to Beta Analytic for standard radiocarbon analysis (Beta-
239146). Only a portion of it was used; the remainder was returned and is curated (2007-10-
104) with the collection. A date of A.D. 1400-1460 resulted from the analysis (radiocarbon
dating results are given in Table 2). Although we have no in situ decorated pottery to help
date Stratum 2a, this radiocarbon date along with the other similarities between M4 and M2
as noted above, make us comfortable assigning a Caloosahatchee IV age to Stratum 2a.
Strata 3 and 4, sometimes indistinguishable from each other, other times distinct,
both contrasted in form, color, and content with the overlying shell of Stratum 2 and the
underlying shell of Stratum 5. Both 3 and 4 document activity surfaces (associated with
structures of some kind), are darker in color, and contain more sand and less shell than 2 and
5. Stratum 3 is described as a medium dark gray sandy sediment with much less shell, animal
bone, charred wood, and artifacts. The shell taxa composition is similar to that of Stratum 2
and as far as was visible during field observation, the relative abundances of the molluscan
taxa also are similar. One shell specimen of Carolina marsh clam (Polymesoda carolina), a
rare occurrence at Pineland, was noted.
A radiocarbon date ofA.D. 1210-1270 was obtained on charred pine wood (plotted
specimen #43, identification by Florida Museum archaeobotanist Donna Ruhl) from Stratum
3, placing it in the Caloosahatchee III period. Based on elevation, it is likely that the east
profile's Stratum 3 is coeval with the south profile's Stratum 3c. In the south profile strata
3a, 2b, 3b, and 2c could be either Caloosahatchee III or IV in age. Stratum 2a is clearly IV in
age, coeval with Stratum 2 in the east profile.
Underlying Stratum 3, Stratum 4 is a light gray sandy sediment but otherwise
appeared in content to have the same materials as Stratum 3. Associated with both strata 3
and 4 are numerous postmolds. When their origins could be determined, these features aided
in the separation of strata 3 and 4. We can say nothing about postmold spatial patterning (and
therefore the position, size, or shape of the multiple Calusa buildings that once stood here)
for the obvious reason that the entire area between the profiles was destroyed and therefore
nothing was documented there. In the profile drawings, we used a dashed line where the two
layers blurred together. As with Stratum 2, the south profile records a series of Stratum 3
deposits progressing to the east and for this reason we labeled them 3a, 3b, and 3c, youngest
to oldest. It is unclear which of these continues around into the east profile (south section)
and so we have labeled the stratum in the southeast corner and in the east and north profiles
as simply 3 with no letter. However, toward the southwest corner in the south profile, 3b is
clearly distinct and has been truncated horizontally (Figure 7). Remnants of Stratum 3b are
detected around the corer in the southwest area of the west profile. We believe that Stratum
3c is separated from 4 by 2d as shown in the south profile and then continues around the west
profile, although it has been greatly damaged by modern disturbance. It pinches out in the
north profile, west section (Figure 9).

Ten pottery sherds, eight Sand-tempered Plain sherds, two Belle Glade Plain sherds,
one large perforated lightning whelk shell (Figure 18), one perforated ponderous ark (Noetia
ponderosa) shell, one lightning whelk columella sinker (Figure 19, right), two bone (cf.
Odocoileus virginlanus) pin/point midsection fragments, two bags of charred wood (one is
#43, 20 gm of which was sent for radiocarbon analysis), two shell specimens for radiocarbon
dating (RC-S#1, RC-S#2), and one sediment sample comprise the plotted items from Stratum
3.
Stratum 4 is recorded in all profiles and considering its relatively level elevation (it
slopes slightly to the east), we believe it represents a large activity surface associated with
one or more structures of some kind. It may well have covered the entire space of Mound
4 and more. Plotted items include at least 13 Sand-tempered Plain sherds, 3 Belle Glade
Plain sherds, one lightning whelk dipper/vessel (Figure 20), one queen conch adze/celt
fragment (Figure 21), one lightning whelk adze/celt blank (but see Stratum 5c below), nine
perforated giant cockle (Dinocardium robustum) shells (Figure 22), two fragments of a deer
cervical vertebra, four sea turtle (Chelonidae) bones, and one sediment sample. Sample RC-S
from Stratum 4 consisted of multiple small lightning whelk shells; these were sent to Beta
Analytic for standard radiocarbon analysis (Beta-239147). An unused portion (2007-10-
107) was returned and is curated. The resulting date is A.D. 800-980 (Table 2), indicating a
Caloosahatchee IIB occupation.
Strata 5, 6, and 7 are quite different from 2, 3, and 4. First, it is most clearly
documented in the south profile that while strata 2 and 3 present a sequence of habitation
that prograded toward the east or landward, strata 5, 6, and 7 present an earlier sequence
of habitation that prograded toward the west or seaward (figures 7 and 11). Second, the
midden assemblages (of animal remains) of the Stratum 2 series and the Stratum 5 series
differ in their observed relative abundances of shell species and bone. The Stratum 5 series
(Sa, 5b, Sc) is characterized as a very dense deposit of shells with sparse light gray sand,
charred wood, artifacts, and a low abundance of animal bone. The most abundant shell
types observed were lightning whelk, pearwhelk, and crown conch. Far less abundant were
eastern oyster, bay scallop, and ribbed mussel. Several shells of southern quahog clam and
banded tulip were also noted. There was a single occurrence of a shark eye shell (Neverita
dhplicata).
Shell sample #2 (2007-10-123), plotted on the east profile (south section) in Stratum
Sc, represents this Caloosahatchee IV molluscan assemblage. Its '"-screened portion was

sorted and quantified (Table 1). Again, the
quantified ribbed mussel proved to be more
substantial (21 individuals; 7.5 percent)
than visual field observation had indicated.
Otherwise, field observation was closely
confirmed by the quantification of Sample
#2. A total of 282 individual molluscs
are represented in the Stratum 5c sample
compared to 74 individuals represented in
the Stratum 2a sample. This is likely a result
of the difference in shell density between the
two strata, with Stratum 5c being the more
dense of the two. Although the same volume
Sof sample was collected from each stratum,
the Stratum 2a sample contained more sand
and other material whereas the Stratum
5c sample contained more shell. Another
interesting comparison of the two samples
can be made in terms of taxa composition.
Although both samples show that lightning
whelk (38 and 47 percent MNI) is the most
Figure 19. Horse conch columella sinker,
igre 19. Hore conch colmella sinker, abundant constituent and that pearwhelk (15
single grooved (2007-10-65), 8.3 cm. long,
single grooved (200 ), 8.3 long, and 17 percent) is the second most abundant,
and lightning whelk columella sinker,
and lightning welk coluella sinker, there are differences in the rankings after that.
single grooved (2007-10-65), 9.6 cm long .
single grooved (), 9.6 cm long Noticeably more abundant in Stratum 2a are
(drawings by Sue Ellen Hunter).
ribbed mussel, oyster, fighting conch, and true
tulip. Noticeably more abundant in Stratum 5c
are crown conch and banded tulip and noticeably absent is fighting conch. This chronological
variation in composition is a pattern that has been recorded elsewhere within the Pineland
complex.
Stratum 5a's only plotted artifact is a single Sand-tempered Plain sherd. A specimen
of quahog shell (RC-S#2) was collected as a dating possibility but not used. A shell sample
(#5) was collected and curated for future analysis. Plotted artifacts from Stratum 5b are
five Sand-tempered Plain sherds and three Belle Glade Plain sherds. One shell sample (#4)
was collected and is curated. All three Belle Glade sherds came from the north profile (west
section).
Fourteen Sand-tempered Plain sherds were plotted in Stratum 5c, many from the east
profile (south section). A shaped rectangular portion of a lightning whelk shell (Figure 23,
cat. no. 2007-10-76) was plotted in the north profile (west section). It is unclear, however,
whether it is associated with 5c or with a Stratum 4 post mold that intruded into the 5c
midden. This object could be interpreted to be either an adze/celt blank or a net-mesh gauge.
The long sides are not quite parallel and are not finely smoothed compared to most known
examples of the latter; these characteristics tend to support the adze/celt blank interpretation.
The object's length, on the other hand (longer than needed for an adze or celt), argues for
its being a gauge, or perhaps a gauge blank. Two specimens of modified bone were plotted

in 5c. One is an unidentified broken
object; it is a worked proximal portion
of a right metatarsal bone of a white-
tailed deer. The other is a portion of a
/ raccoon (Procyon lotor) tibia exhibiting
cut marks. Two concentrations of charred
wood were plotted and bagged. One
sediment sample and one shell (#2)
sample from 5c are plotted and curated.
(Results for shell sample #2 are reported
above.) Sample RC-S#1, a quahog shell,
was sent for analysis (Beta-239148)
Resulting in an A.D. 670-790 date (Table
2).
The Stratum 6 series (6a, 6b, 6c)
separates Stratum 5 into several episodes
of midden deposit; it is characterized as
a light gray sandy deposit with much less
shell, sparse animal bone, artifacts, etc.
No post molds can be seen associated
Figure 21. Queen conch adze fragment with 6a, 6b, or 6c, not surprising because
(2007-10-71; Stratum 4, #71), 9.7 cm. long in each case the strata slope to the west
(drawing by Sue Ellen Hunter). The strata nonetheless appear to be
activity surfaces. If one closely examines
the north profile (west and east sections,
Figure 9) and east profile, north section (Figure 10), a matching set of the strata 5 and 6 series
can be detected, again documenting the westward progradation.
Stratum 6 artifacts are one Belle Glade Plain sherd from 6a and three Sand-tempered
Plain sherds from 6b. Artifacts from 6c are one Sand-tempered Plain sherd, one Belle Glade
Plain sherd, and one elongated pebble of unidentified fossil bone. One sediment sample and
a sample of lightning whelk shells (RC-S) for possible dating were collected from the east
profile (south section). The RC-S shell sample was not dated and is curated for future use.
Because Stratum 7's shell density and content are the same as that of the Stratum 5
series, it might have been given a 5d assignment except that it contained much more animal
bone, primarily fish bone. Plotted items are 11 Sand-tempered Plain sherds, two possible
Belle Glade Plain sherds, one deer thoracic vertebra, one proximal fragment of a raccoon
ulna, one sample (RC-S) of lightning whelk shells for possible radiocarbon dating, one
sediment sample, and one shell sample (#3).
Stratum 8 is different in appearance from all other strata. It is a black sandy deposit
with crushed shell and abundant bone (primarily fish bone). Shell types and their relative
abundances are similar to strata 5 through 7 except that ribbed mussel is abundant and pen
shell (Atrina sp.) is present. The stratum appears below Stratum 7 all along the east profile.
Some brief troweling at several spots revealed that the stratum is at least 10 cm thick. Two
plotted artifacts are Sand-tempered Plain sherds. One of these (2007-10-63) is a rim sherd
with minute parallel tracks on the lip. One sediment sample and one radiocarbon sample

of lightning whelk shells (RC-S) were
collected. The latter was sent for analysis
with a resulting date of A.D. 960-1050
(Table 2, Beta-239149). We believe this
date to be too late based on the elevation
of the deposit, the radiocarbon date from
Stratum 5c, and the faunal assemblage.
We were unable to investigate
the deposits that lay below Stratum 8 in
any manner. But if this area of Mound 4
is comparable to the area near Mound 2
where our Operation C excavations (1988-
1992) were located (and we believe it
likely to be), then deposits should extend
downward at least another 17 levels (or
1.7 m) from levels 86 to 102.
To summarize, Strata 2a, 2b, 2c,
and 2d are midden deposits. Stratum
2a dates to the Caloosahatchee IV
period while 2b, 2c, and 2d may be of
Figure 22. Perforated cockle (2007-10-87; similar age or one or more may date to
Stratum 4, #87), 9.9 cm. long (drawing by Caloosahatchee III. Strata 3, 3a, 3b, and
Sue Ellen Hunter). 3c represent activity surfaces perhaps
all associated with structures and date to
the Caloosahatchee III period. Stratum 4, also an activity surface, clearly associated with
structural features, is Caloosahatchee IIB in age. Strata 5a, 5b, 5c, and 7 are midden deposits
dating to the Caloosahatchee IIA-late period and 6a, 6b, and 6c are activity surfaces of
similar age. Stratum 8 is no doubt also of IIA age, in spite of its aberrant radiocarbon date.

UNPROVENIENCED ARTIFACTS AND BONE, 2007
Unprovenienced artifacts and bone specimens (2007-10-113) were collected mostly
from the bottom of the drainfield pit (see Figure 6 for location in relation to the house
construction). Several historic items, twentieth-century in age, were collected and are listed
in Appendix A. The prehistoric pottery assemblage includes 265 Sand-tempered Plain sherds
(234 body sherds, 31 rims), 73 Belle Glade Plain sherds (55 body sherds, 18 rims), two St.
John's Check Stamped sherds (one body, one rim), one Weeden Island Plain body sherd, and
one Dunn's Creek Red body sherd. A second group of pottery sherds (no catalog number)
was retained by current landowners, the Bundschus. These sherds are listed in Appendix A;
included in the group are examples of Surfside Incised, Fort Drum Incised, and St. Johns
Plain.
Unprovenienced shell artifacts (2007-10-113) include eight lightning whelk hammers,
one horse conch columella sinker, one quahog clam anvil, two sunray venus clam knife/
scrapers, one surf clam knife/scraper, and three perforated giant cockle shells. A second
group of shell artifacts (no catalog number) was retained by the owners. These are listed in

Appendix A and include whelk and horse
conch hammers, bivalve knife/scrapers,
perforated bivalves (ark and cockle), and a
quahog clam anvil/chopper.
A number ofunprovenienced bones
(2007-10-113), mostly fragmented, were
collected and are curated in the collection;
the general criterion for their collection was
large size (larger than fish bone) with the
intent to examine them closely to determine
whether or not any were human. This was
important because strata 5, 7, and 8 dated
to Caloosahatchee IIA and it has been
documented elsewhere that IIA people
sometimes buried their dead in shell middens.
Thirteen mammal bones were either securely
identified as white-tailed deer or as probable
deer. One of these was a worked (and burned)
metapodial fragment. One mammal bone
fragment, a shaft of a long bone, could not
Sbe identified (human, deer, and raccoon were
eliminated as possibilities). Eight bones were
Figure 23. Rectangular artifact, possibly identified as turtle carapace (one possibly
an adze/celt blank or a net-mesh gauge cut). One bone fragment, another shaft
(2007-10-76; Stratum 4/5c, #2), 3.6 cm. with ends missing, is from a medium-sized
wide (drawing by Sue Ellen Hunter). bird but otherwise could not be identified
(ducks and other similarly sized birds were
eliminated as possibilities, as were wading
birds). Last, one unusual bone fragment was burned and possibly cut and was not identified
(a human identification, however, was eliminated). A second group ofunprovenienced bone
specimens (no catalog number) was retained by the current owners. These specimens are also
listed in the catalog (Appendix A).

ADDITIONAL UNPROVENIENCED ARTIFACTS FROM DIETLER'S 2006 WORK
Time did not permit screening of any of the backdirt piles during the brief field
investigations undertaken by us in 2007. However, in 2006 a truckload of the backdirt from
the construction trenches was delivered to the RRC and dumped in the back yard of the RRC
offices at 7450 Pineland Road. Following Dietler's numbering system, this pile of dirt was
designated "Pile T." In 2007 and early 2008, RRC volunteers processed some of the sediment
from Pile T through /4-inch screens, looking for artifacts. The resulting items were given the
catalogue numbers 2006-15-98 through 2006-15-111 and are included in Appendix A of this
report.
Included among these /4-inch-screened materials are both prehistoric and historic
period materials, including two complete hafted bifaces (a heavily re-sharpened stemmed

DISCUSSION
This project had two main objectives:
(1) to determine whether or not human
remains were present and (2) to document
the sedimentation layers for comparison with
previous systematic work at the Pineland Site
Complex.
No human bones or burial pits
were found during the 2007 investigation
of the septic drainfield excavation. One
human tooth was found during screening
of the 2006 backdirt from Pile T, but this
was almost surely isolated and not from
an intact unmarked human burial because
additional human bones would have been
noticed by Dietler in 2006 had that been the
case. Additionally, it is doubtful that Pile T
included Caloosahatchee IIA materials (recall
that IIA people sometimes buried their dead
in middens).
Stratigraphic documentation and
radiocarbon dating indicate that the area
destroyed by the 2007 septic excavation
o in 2 contained undisturbed evidence of intensive
habitation during the Caloosahatchee IIA,
0 cm 5 IIB, III, and IV periods (A.D. 500-1500). The
evidence is in the form of both accumulated
Figure 24. Hafted bifaces (2006-15-98 and midden deposits and activity surfaces/floors
-99). associated with numerous post molds.

figure zs. rertoraten snarK toot witn engraved Dase (LUUo-13-1UL), aistal ena or a
bone point (-101), two fragments of engraved bone pins (-100, -101), and a fragment of a
peg-topped bone pin (-100).
Although no artifacts specifically
known to date to the sixteenth
and seventeenth centuries were
found, occupation during this time
cannot be ruled out. Historical
artifacts indicate occupation
of the immediate area during

centuries, and possibly as early as
the late eighteenth century Cuban
fishery period.
O in 2 Radiocarbon assays
indicate a Caloosahatchee IV date
for Stratum 2a, which lies above
all of the Stratum 3 deposits. In
0 Cm 5 Stratum 2a, shell composition
along with the occurrence
Figure 26. Shell rectangle with perforation (2006-15- of small whelk hammers in
109), shell hemisphere (-104), and faceted clear glass a dense shell midden at this
bead (-108).

particular elevation reminds us of the
Caloosahatchee IV midden in nearby
BCM2 (Walker and Marquardt 2008),
where a similar molluscan assemblage
and a concentration of hammers also
occur.
Stratum 3 dates to
Caloosahatchee III, Stratum 4 dates to
Caloosahatchee IIB, and Stratum 5 to
Caloosahatchee IIA (Table 2). These
dates are consistent with the few
artifacts identified from the disturbed
sediments and the observed faunal
assemblages observed in the profiles.
Furthermore, the Stratum 3 activity
surface that dates to Caloosahatchee
III is at the same elevation as a very
similar Caloosahatchee III period
surface in Operation I of Brown's
Complex Mound 2, located to the
Sin 2 southeast of Brown's Complex Mound
4 (Walker and Marquardt 2008).
o cm s The Caloosahatchee IIB
radiocarbon date from Stratum 4
Figure 27. Lightning whelk shell disk (2006-15- caused us to re-examine Brown's
106), horse conch shell columella single-grooved Complex Mound 2 excavation I-4
sinker (-105). profiles to consider the possibility
of a IIB presence there as well. We
had previously interpreted IIB as
unrepresented there based on pottery. Indeed, Cordell's (2008) pottery analysis (by arbitrary
level) shows no decisive IIB assemblage. But the 1-4 profiles (especially the east one; Walker
and Marquardt 2008) reveal an activity floor subadjacent to the Stratum 19 activity floor that
was radiocarbon-dated to Caloosahatchee III (see especially Stratum 26 in the east profile).
The similarity between the Mound 4 and Mound 2 profiles suggests that a IIB deposit
(Stratum 26, etc.) may be present in Mound 2 after all. In Trench 10, which extended through
Brown's Complex Court 1, only the ephemeral Stratum 5 was tentatively hypothesized to
date to IIB, but this had not been certain. Stratum 4 in Trench 10, a dense shell midden dated
to IIA, is almost surely coeval with a very similar deposit in Mound 4 (Stratum 5, described
here).
The area of the drainfield excavation documented by us in 2007 was a little over 13
meters from the construction trenches studied by John Dietler in 2006. Comparison of the
drainfield excavation's south and west profiles (our Figures 7, 8, 11, and 12) with Dietler's
drawing of the south construction trench (his Figure 8) suggests continuity between our
Stratum 2c and his "Dense Shell" layer and between our Stratum 3c and his "Dark Sand 1"
layer. It is also possible that his "Dark Sand 2" is equivalent to our Stratum 4, although we

are less sure of this. At times, his "Dark Sand 1" and "Dark Sand 2" are not in contact, but
are separated by shell midden layers trending downward and to the west. This is similar to
the western stratification in the drainfield pit (see our Stratum 2d in the west profile).

CONCLUSIONS
In late September 2007, mechanical excavation of a septic drainfield pit destroyed
archaeological deposits in Brown's Complex Mound 4 of the Pineland Site Complex.
Because Caloosahatchee IIA (A.D. 500-800) shell midden was evident among the exposed
deposits, the possibility existed that human burials could be present. However, after careful
examination (cutting back and documentation) of the exposed profiles, no human bones or
burial pits were found.
The area disturbed by both the house construction (see Dietler 2007) and septic
drainfield excavation was intensively occupied during precolumbian times. Stratigraphic
analysis, radiocarbon dating, and artifact analysis establish that the area was occupied from
at least A.D. 650 through the twentieth century. Judging from our archaeological excavations
in nearby areas of the site complex, undisturbed deposits beneath the drainfield excavation
probably date to the early Caloosahatchee IIA period (A.D. 500-650).
The strata documented in the drainfield pit alternate between dense shell middens and
dark, sandy activity surfaces. During Caloosahatchee IIA, these appear to dip downward and
to the west, as if the area of main occupation were located nearby, but to the east (see Figure
7). In contrast, both the middens and the activity stratum of the Caloosahatchee IIB period
appear to be more horizontal, suggesting that significant activities took place in this area at
that time. Finally, deposits of the Caloosahatchee III and IV period are either horizontal or
dip downward toward the east, suggesting that occupation may have remained in this area
and expanded toward the east during the Caloosahatchee IV period.

REFERENCES CITED
Cordell, Ann S.
2008 Technological Investigation of Pottery Variability at the Pineland Site Complex.
In The Archaeology of Pineland: A Coastal Southwest Florida Site Complex, A.D.
50-1710, edited by K. J. Walker and W. H. Marquardt. Institute of Archaeology and
Paleoenvironmental Studies, Monograph 4. University of Florida, Gainesville. (In
preparation.)
Dietler, John
2007 Archaeological Monitoring and Salvage at Brown's Complex Mound 4, Pineland
Site Complex (8LL1902), Pineland, Florida, April 2006. Report submitted to Chris
and Gayle Bundschu by the Randell Research Center, Pineland.
Marquardt, William H.
1992 Shell Artifacts from the Calusa Area. In Culture and Environment in the Domain of
the Calusa, edited by W. H. Marquardt, pp. 191-227. Institute of Archaeology and
Paleoenvironmental Studies, Monograph 1. University of Florida, Gainesville.